“The debate about accelerationism has been violent and vituperative. Here I want to consider the battle over the notion of the future. Accelerationism, in its various forms, has often claimed a monopoly on the future. The argument is that only by engaging with capitalist forms of technology and abstraction can we envisage a future beyond capitalism. Neoliberal capitalism only provides more of the same, while accelerationism can force a new future into being or even invent the future. Here I want to consider various alternative futures, which are, at least, reactionary, if not fascist. My suggestion is accelerationism does not have a monopoly on the future and needs to consider how these reactionary futures engage certain forms of technology and abstraction to malign ends. Rather than continuing a polemic with accelerationism, one that has exhausted its novelty, the battle being fought here, tonight, is a battle to think the present as a warzone in which our future is at stake.”